[hkmurakami]

It may matter, since VC returns are dominated by the outlier companies that return 100x.

If the next Slack (i.e. companies where VCs form a line to have them take their money) always pass on Benchmark after remembering this, instead choosing to take money from Sequoia/A16Z/NEA etc., who are also competent investors who aren't complete marks, then returns may take a hit.

[aetherson]

I mean, maybe. But Benchmark is heavily bought into Uber. They've got a lot to lose/gain here. And they have a reputation to defend not just with future founders, but also future LPs. You can bet that there are a lot of potential LPs looking at VC behavior here, and that ones who are deferential to Kalanick will have a harder time raising future funds if this whole thing goes tits up.

Benchmark clearly believes that Kalanick is toxic to Uber's success. Given the amount of money they have in the game, and given the belief that Kalanick will sink Uber, it's pretty hard for me to come up with odds that future founders will be Benchmark-averse that overcome the amount of money they have in play with Uber plus whatever heat they'll take from their LPs.

[calafrax]

that assumes that the majority of founders would view what benchmark is doing as negative. to me it looks like good business.